i'm confused. so you're only allowed to be positive about the current lineup? but if new blood comes in, you decide to be absolutely negative about it? how does 'player development angle become void' just because you say it will? what if wiggins/parker/whoever come out guns ablazin' for utah/some other team and they get catapulted right past the raptors who won't have anything to show for this entire year minus a short little playoff run that goes nowhere? do you really think we're going to be extending all the sacramento players past this season?

basically, why would you pissed about having more value assets (either for growth or trade) at the cost of very little?

you didnt read the thread of comments that lead to this one. No one is talking about the lineups, we were talking about enjoying the games.

Also. All this talk about John Salmons being the option near the end of the game. The reason for that was because he was being guarded by a rookie (PJ III is basically a rookie, didn't play much last season). OKC locked down on DeMar and Kyle so the only other guy was Salmons and he hit some timely shots. It had nothing to do with him being "the number 1 option in crunch time". It was simply the right move at the time.

Everyone understands WHY it was done. We just don't agree with doing it. Salmons hit a couple shots (one of which was a bad fadeaway that usually doesn't go in), and also jacked a couple bad shots and was lucky to get a bailout foul call. He did find Lowry for that 3, but that was it.

Everyone understands WHY it was done. We just don't agree with doing it. Salmons hit a couple shots (one of which was a bad fadeaway that usually doesn't go in), and also jacked a couple bad shots and was lucky to get a bailout foul call. He did find Lowry for that 3, but that was it.

I don't think everyone understood it at all. And you also seem to just completely ignore what he just said. Who would you have preferred to take shots at the end then? Ross who was shooting 2/10?